Çakmak Gülce, Subaşı Meryem Gülce, Sert Murat, Yilmaz Burak
Buser Foundation Scholar for Implant Dentistry, Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Kütahya Sağlık Bilimleri University, Kütahya, Turkey.
J Prosthet Dent. 2023 Mar;129(3):495-506. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.06.023. Epub 2021 Jul 21.
Which surface treatment provides optimal surface roughness, microhardness, and wear behavior for computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) materials and their enamel antagonists is unclear.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of surface treatment on the surface roughness, microhardness, and 2-body wear of different CAD-CAM materials and their enamel antagonists.
Monolithic zirconia, polymer-infiltrated ceramic network, lithium disilicate, leucite-reinforced ceramic, zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate, and feldspathic ceramic specimens were sliced into 2-mm-thick rectangular plates and divided into polished or glazed subgroups (n=6). After surface roughness and microhardness measurements, the specimens were loaded at 49 N for 250 000 cycles and simultaneously thermocycled (5 °C and 55 °C). All specimens were scanned before and after the wear test by using a scanner. The volumetric loss and wear depth of the materials and the volumetric and height loss of the enamel were calculated, and scanning electron microscope images of the specimens were made. Multiple 2-way ANOVAs and Tukey honestly significant difference tests were used to assess the effect of material and surface treatment on surface roughness, microhardness, and wear behavior of materials and enamel (α=.05).
Material and surface treatment interactions affected the surface roughness (P<.001), microhardness (P<.001), volumetric loss of materials (P=.044), and height loss of enamel (P<.001).
Polishing resulted in higher surface roughness and microhardness than glazing. Volumetric loss depended on the material, which affected the height loss of the antagonists. Glazing and polishing had similar effects on the volumetric loss of materials and antagonists. No correlation was found between the wear of materials and the antagonists, nor between the surface roughness of materials and the volumetric loss of materials or antagonists.
对于计算机辅助设计与计算机辅助制造（CAD-CAM）材料及其牙釉质对抗物而言，哪种表面处理能提供最佳的表面粗糙度、显微硬度和磨损性能尚不清楚。
本体外研究的目的是评估表面处理对不同CAD-CAM材料及其牙釉质对抗物的表面粗糙度、显微硬度和双体磨损的影响。
将整体式氧化锆、聚合物渗透陶瓷网络、二硅酸锂、白榴石增强陶瓷、氧化锆增强硅酸锂和长石质陶瓷标本切成2毫米厚的矩形板，并分为抛光或上釉亚组（n = 6）。在测量表面粗糙度和显微硬度后，将标本在49 N的载荷下加载250000次循环，并同时进行热循环（5°C和55°C）。在磨损试验前后，使用扫描仪对所有标本进行扫描。计算材料的体积损失和磨损深度以及牙釉质的体积和高度损失，并制作标本的扫描电子显微镜图像。使用多个双向方差分析和Tukey真实显著性差异检验来评估材料和表面处理对材料和牙釉质的表面粗糙度、显微硬度和磨损行为的影响（α = 0.05）。
材料和表面处理的相互作用影响表面粗糙度（P < 0.001）、显微硬度（P < 0.001）、材料的体积损失（P = 0.044）和牙釉质的高度损失（P < 0.001）。
与上釉相比，抛光导致更高的表面粗糙度和显微硬度。体积损失取决于材料，这会影响对抗物的高度损失。上釉和抛光对材料和对抗物的体积损失有相似的影响。未发现材料与对抗物的磨损之间、材料的表面粗糙度与材料或对抗物的体积损失之间存在相关性。
